Jump to content

User talk:PARAKANYAA/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

About the Draft:The_Zhao_Fuqiang_Case

Hello, PARAKANYAA.Sorry to hear that you have rejected my off-draft apply of Draft:The_Zhao_Fuqiang_Case, I hope you can give specific suggestions for improvement. Besides, you mentioned that there are problems with this article in neutrality perspective. I am confused and hope you can explain it because it is translated from a Chinese version.Hzt0208042508415531 tw (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hzt0208042508415531 tw Hi! I will discuss this with you on the draft's talk page, so others can see it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi PARAKANYAA, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Elli (talk | contribs) 00:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death

The article The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death for comments about the article, and Talk:The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 02:22, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Nya Doxa

Hey, I've added some sources, if you want to take a new look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nya Doxa. In this case, I think it was very difficult to find anything from home without access to a Swedish newspaper archive (a paid service), but I found some long articles about the publishing house from the late 1990s and early 2000s. /Julle (talk) 08:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Julle Thank you very much for finding sources :) Yeah, I did try, but I had no luck. I withdrew. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thank you for the comments on the List of generation IX Pokémon nomination! I know I sent it to the wrong place by accident, but I greatly appreciate the comments and insight all the same. :) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
@Pokelego999 You're welcome! Good luck with the FLC! PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faultlines (Megalogenis book)

Hello, PARAKANYAA,

You can't withdraw and close an AFD if there are any Delete votes cast which there were in this AFD. Please revert your closure and re-tag the article. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

@Liz My interpretation was that due to the fact that the only vote was based on my nomination's assertion of there being no sources it did not otherwise count, but I guess that is wrong, so okay, I have done so. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for doing so. While it might seem like I'm scolding you, I'm actually trying to save you from a trip to Deletion Review in case your closure was contested. Believe me, having your actions scrutinized at DRV can be a brutal experience, as bad as ANI. It might seem bureaucratic but it's best to abide by the rules even if it means that the AFD is open a few extra days. Liz Read! Talk! 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi PARAKANYAA, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! signed, Rosguill talk 19:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to NPP!

I see you've been granted NPP! Welcome! I hope you enjoy it! Feel free to reach out if you have any questions. You can also join our Discord. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
@Significa liberdade Thank you! Hah, it's temporary but hopefully I do an ok job so I can reapply when it runs out. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
With your experience with AFD, I'm guessing you'll do great. :) Feel free to add your name to the September backlog drive to get some extra barn stars, too. ;p Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Joshua Laurent Zarka

Was going to create a page for Joshua Zarka but then saw a rejected draft already existed. You were the last editor to reject it so just letting you know that I added about 15 references to it and resubmitted it. MaskedSinger (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger Well, that's better, but my biggest issues are 1) the quality of those sources and 2) the formatting (though that isn't a decline reason). I will let someone else review it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Truth be told, I didn't create the draft so didn't touch the copy apart from adding that he's the current ambassador. My focus was on adding references but I can definitely look at that. MaskedSinger (talk) 12:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Also, it was declined not rejected. Rejected means no more submitting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
ok thanks. I am sometimes oblivious to the finer nuances of Wikipedia and the various terminology. MaskedSinger (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Sea of Dreams

Good day! I've just received the message that you added a notability tag to three of my articles. I fully understand it for "Transition Dreams" and "Induction", but really need an explanation for "Sea of Dreams". The article lists four publications, an upcoming TV adaption and two reviews from independent sources. With the latter it fulfills the first criterion listed at the necessary notatbility criteria for books. I'd also argue that the fifth criterion is fulfilled, given how famous Liu Cixin is in- and outside of China with interest in his work currently increasing following the release of 3 Body Problem by Netflix in March 2024.

I really don't understand what you think is missing to establish notability? Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Samuel Adrian Antz My issue with the Sea of Dreams page is that the sources showed clear notability for the collection it was reviewing, which Sea of Dreams was a part of. The reviews are for the collection, not this story, but I am unsure if their coverage of this story specifically is long enough to count as sigcov, or if it would be inherited down from that anyway - which would be less of a concern if the amount of the sources focusing on this story specifically were longer. Are there non-primary sources about the adaptions? PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
@PARAKANYAA Thanks for the quick answer! I can definitely go on a search for such sources. So far almost all sources I've added for (english and german) articles about short stories came from reviews about the whole collection in which they have appeared in. I've never been told that this was a problem and hence have continued to do it like that. I'm currently finishing articles for all ten short stories by Liu Cixin published in his collection The Wandering Earth and all reviews I've added so far concern the whole collection. I was about to publish the first ones (those with three reviews and one with two longer reviews), but am now doubtful. Should I continue or first search for other sources? Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 21:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
@Samuel Adrian Antz I'm not 100% clear on how it works with short stories, in all honesty. NBOOK does not specify how they are treated, if there is clear guidance somewhere I have not found it. My rationale was something along the lines of the fact that notability is not inherited. However, I think a bigger issue here is the length of content in the reviews of the collections, from my look all the ones in that article are fairly short when it comes to content on Sea of Dreams and not the collection as a whole; if the review contains significant amounts of content on the story itself then it may be warranted. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
@Samuel Adrian Antz Also, the fifth criterion is IMO an extremely high bar that is frequently misused, it is only for people so famous that their entire body of works is the subject of significant study, like Philip K. Dick or Tolkien or something. The author may be getting there but from my look he isn't there yet; wouldn't be surprised if he does eventually though PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Solar Temple

Something completely different but this "Solar Temple" stuff is pretty interesting! Do you have a book or documentary recommendation (in English)? Polygnotus (talk) 02:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus It's extremely annoying but there is a total of one good book (or, well, any book) in English on it, which is The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death. This book is very easy to find, but is a very scholarly look at it. The more journalistic overviews are all in French sadly. Of the chapters in The Temple of Death the best general overviews are Hall & Schuyler's chapter and Introvigne's chapter (Introvigne can be too nice to cults sometimes, but I find he tends to be very good on the OTS and doesn't do any cult apologism when talking about it). There's also the chapter by Clusel & Palmer in the 2020 book The Mystical Geography of Quebec, which mostly focuses on them in Canada but gives a great general overview of the group before that.
The overwhelming majority of coverage on it is French, which I luckily can understand decently, but other people are mostly out of luck. I have pretty much every reliable source on the OTS (which cost......so much money.......), my long term goal onwiki is to make all the related pages high quality which I am slowly accomplishing bit by bit (I recently finished the 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide and 1995 Vercors massacre pages, working on the 1994 one but it's going slowly). The 1997 and 2000 Bédat et al. books are the best journalistic sources but, again, in French. La Fraternité is also extremely good but also in French. Every page on it onwiki is almost entirely written by me at this point (no one else seems to have any interest, and the language barrier is not helping) PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
@Polygnotus There's also the 1999 journal article by Mayer which is free to read here which is basically just a condensed version of his French book Les Mythes du Temple Solaire. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, I have ordered The Order of the Solar Temple: The Temple of Death and I will read Mayer's article. Weird how some aspects are so, ehm, Heaven's Gatey. Someone I know has a family member who is a victim of Scientology which is how I became interested in cults. I have also ordered Cults in Our Midst btw. Sadly most of the languages I speak are computer languages. Polygnotus (talk) 02:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
@Polygnotus It's fascinating how similar it is to Heaven's Gate! A lot of the sources mention how, despite having completely different origins (the OTS emerging more out of the Rosicrucianism/AMORC/Templar milieu, while Heaven's Gate emerged from more extraterrestrial type thought, though the OTS had that too), they developed an extremely similar idea, even using extremely similar language. Like a very culty form of convergent evolution. I plan to add this I am working on expanding the beliefs section.
My biggest interest is mostly crime/criminology honestly, so I find cults that commit crime to be extra fascinating and it gradually spread to the topic more broadly. I find the OTS so fascinating because it was so high profile but most English speakers had no clue about it, also it's just an especially wild story.
Thank you for expressing your interest btw. If you need any help on the Landmark page I will be willing to try; they interest me too it's just a bit of an intimidating field to try to stumble into... that page history is sure something. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
I think the similarity comes from the fact that most humans are just not very creative beings. The leaders are often very charismatic... but not very bright. The school of "we are all spacetravellers/death is just spacetravel" thought is just what happens when you give an immature mind access to weed. Smart people don't become leaders because they are almost never interested in leading. This is also why Xenu uses Douglas DC-8-like spacecraft. Perhaps someone has done research on cult memes? Polygnotus (talk) 03:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
@Polygnotus A lot of the big 90s cults that exploded into violence (which are literally called "the Big Five") would reference each other which some of the sources point out. The Solar Temple said they wanted to be "more spectacular" than the Branch Davidians, while Heaven's Gate expressed sympathies towards them, Aum Shinrikyo, and Jonestown and said they would all make it to the "next level" AFAIK. Never seen anyone call it a meme, but I think a lot of that series of violent cult incidents in the 90s was probably something like social contagion. I think with the new discoveries of space things in the 20th century it was recontextualized with past religious experiences. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Upcoming expiry of your patroller right

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 2024-09-20 00:00:00. For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 04:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Misleading edit summary

Information icon Hello, I'm GenoV84. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Theistic Satanism in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. GenoV84 (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@GenoV84 was a typo. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
@GenoV84 And my rationale for that edit was that the 1st and 2nd edition of that book are actually completely different in content despite having the same title so 1) linking to the page that I wrote that explains this helps and 2) it needs to specify what edition it is, which it doesn't. At least 3 times I have seen, at least 2 of which were on Satanism pages, someone has made a large scale content removal because they checked one version of the book and not the other and then believed that it was false referencing. I would like this to stop happening. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Harassment Architecture cover.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Harassment Architecture cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Hugo Jackson manifesto

hello PARAKANYAA, Hugo quite clearly wanted to commit a mass murder, literally quoted in the source is "I’ll try to kill as many as possible in the cafeteria". 79.19.88.227 (talk) 00:38, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. I will self revert my revert. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
thank you. 79.19.88.227 (talk) 01:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi PARAKANYAA, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! signed, Rosguill talk 16:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mohammed Bouyeri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Theo van Gogh. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide

The article 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide and Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide

The article 1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide for comments about the article, and Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Work together at some point?

Hey Para! I was wondering if at some point you'd want to work on an article together? We have relatively similar (albeit a bit strange and a bit grotesque) interests, and I'd be open to any topic, although It's just a suggestion. Great work on the Saint Casimir suicide article!  :) SirMemeGod  19:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

@Sir MemeGod Yes, that sounds like a good idea! I find a lot of the articles you have made to be very interesting :)
I don't have any ideas at the moment sadly but if I do we could definitely collaborate. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Jouret / Di Mambro

You saying that you "like" something is irrelevant - you do not WP:OWN the articles. See WP:DATEVAR which confirms that the same date format should be retained and used throughout the articles. GiantSnowman 09:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman DATEVAR is not about how the WIKITEXT is formatted when it is invisible to the reader. CS1 templates standardize it. It is completely acceptable for the wikitext to be yyyy-mm-dd and for the front-facing format to be DMY, otherwise it wouldn't specify that you can use yyyy-mm-dd in cites. You changing this is in violation of WP:DATEVAR. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
You haven't deal with my WP:OWN concerns? And also your blind revert, changing the date of the template. GiantSnowman 09:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman It is not WP:OWN I am simply resisting a change in citation formatting for no reason, see WP:CITEVAR. Why would you change the date of the template? You didn't change it from dmy to mdy? Is it not supposed to be when it was initially placed there? Or are you really supposed to update the time every single time you change a citation? PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
I am merely bringing some consistency to the article. Your immediate response was "i like it this way" [sic], which violates WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and you have no reason to 'resist the change' as you put it.
The template documentation says the the date should be updated when the style was last checked/changed (which is what I did) - the fact you don't know that is again telling of your utter ignorance. GiantSnowman 09:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman Yes... so if I unchanged the format by reverting you, of course I would not keep the changed template??? But call me "utterly ignorant", thanks for the personal attack mate! How professional. It is already consistent. It uses yyyy-mm-dd in references which is explicitly called out as fine in MOS:NUM! PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
And again, yyyy-mm-dd is explicitly fine in citations, but not in the body, so it is perfectly fine for the citations to not match the body, especially since it is invisible! PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
But you changed the format - before you began OWNing those articles, the format was not YYYY-MM-DD, see this. Why did you change the established format, in breach of WP:DATERET? Why do you continue to edit war? Do I need to bring this to ANI? GiantSnowman 10:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman I changed it to be consistent with the formatting of all the other pages on the same topic, which is a reason above the singular improperly formatted citation with a day-level date format in the article. There was another reason for it (it facilitated merging and copying content between relevant pages with greater ease) which went over the CITEVAR concerns on an article with One Source With A Date Format. Do you believe the yyyy-mm-dd format is not acceptable? If so, may we discuss this further on the talk page for MOS:NUM? PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
So you admit you changed the date format in the first place? For no reason, given that at that time, the date format for citations in the parent article was also not YYYY-MM-DD, and instead you changed them all? I suggest you please revert yourself (and apologise), before I take this to ANI for a deeper look into your editing. GiantSnowman 10:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman I reverted it on the Jouret article. As I wrote the Di Mambro one. I apologize for this edit warring, but your initial summary implied that yyyy-mm-dd was not a proper format, which it is.
The reason the OTS article uses the yyyy-mm-dd format is because I did that in preparation for fixing the old English article with a translation from the French, which used multiple formats, one of which was yyyy-mm-dd.
So now we have a situation in which the Jouret article uses a completely different format from all the other articles on the topic. I consider this irritating. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
My suggestion to fix this issue? Bring all the related articles back to proper date formatting, as it was before you began editing in mid-2023 - then we have no issues from my side (as all articles use correct and original date formatting), and no issues for your side (the articles are consistent). Then we can move on. GiantSnowman 10:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
PS appreciate the self-revert on Jouret! GiantSnowman 10:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman What is "improper" about the formatting? The only two articles that existed prior to my editing were the Jouret article and the main article. I don't think two articles in the topic area should be a completely different format from all the others. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
for the record i get it if you want me to change it back to how it was then i just don't see what is "improper" here about the format PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman Sorry if this comes off as rude, genuinely, but my biggest question here is if there is some kind of issue with yyyy-mm-dd: if there is I would very much like to know now because this is how I have written every single article I have made myself. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm fully aware that YYYY-MM-DD can be used - I'm just of the view that it shouldn't be, there's a reason why the script changes it, and especially when the original format was different! GiantSnowman 10:43, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman To my knowledge the script changes it because, because in the past, if it had either a dmy or mdy template and used the wikitext date format, it would display that, however now the text format is overruled by the template when it comes to the display. I don't think it's fair to view it as an improper format for wikitext just because a script changes it.
Your point on the original format is fair I guess. If you want to change the main one you want to you can I guess (not that i own it just saying citevar and dateretain)? I'm willing to be honest this is probably very stupid but I do have OCD and incredibly, incredibly minor things being "wrong" disturb me greatly, which is why I got so edit-warrey. I apologize for that. In any case how much this upset me has made me realize that anyone with OCD should probably not be editing an encyclopedia, haha. Apologies for my behavior. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Apology accepted - and likewise, I am sorry if my reaction was OTT. Are you happy if we restore the articles as per my edits, and same with the parent article? GiantSnowman 10:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman I wouldn't say happy but I am aware that I am technically per policy in the wrong here so, oh well, yes go ahead. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Noted, thanks. GiantSnowman 11:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman And you repeated the same change on the Di Mambro article, which I wrote in its entirety. If your gripe is to reset the style to how it used to be, you would maintain it how I did it then, but no. So clearly this is not about DATERET since you did not mention that, it is about the yyyy-mm-dd format, which is fine. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
No, the issue is now - 1) your edit warring 2) your explanation that you simply don't like things 3) the fact that the more I look into this, the more it becomes apparent that YOU changed the date formats on all related articles in the first place! GiantSnowman 10:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

  • Hi Parakanyaa. I was reviewing File:DoAndroidsDream.png for potential upload to Commons, and I see that you commented "i checked the book cover - does not contain a copyright for the cover individually, merely a credit without copyright symbol or year. due to the fact that the jacket required a separate copyright this is PD". Do you have a reference for that? I am aware that case law has required separate registration and notice for cover illustrations (link for Jaws), but in that example the registration/notice they were referring to was inside the book.
I am seeing a registration for the book, but I do not see a registration for a cover illustration. However, I don't have access to a first edition to verify whether notice was given.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492 I could have said that better, my point was more that there was no notice for the art, apologies for the ambiguity. I checked both inside the book and the cover jacket, there is no notice on either. The cover art notice can be either on the jacket or inside the book, I've seen both. But if there is no notice for the cover and only one for the book it is PD. Here's a copy on eBay where you can see the copyright notice internal to the book as well as the outside jacket. The back of the flap says it was made by Harry Sehring but does not contain a notice. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:49, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Néo-Phare

On 7 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Néo-Phare, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that there was a doomsday cult named after Neo from The Matrix? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Néo-Phare. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Néo-Phare), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Néo-Phare

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Néo-Phare you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Voorts -- Voorts (talk) 00:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

September 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
This award is given in recognition to PARAKANYAA for accumulating at least 25 points during the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PARAKANYAA/Archive_2&oldid=1251399093"